Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2151 - 2160 of 30191 for de.
Search results 2151 - 2160 of 30191 for de.
[PDF]
State v. Dante R. Voss
, which we review de novo; whether a new factor warrants a sentence modification is committed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18388 - 2017-09-21
, which we review de novo; whether a new factor warrants a sentence modification is committed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18388 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Craig A. Sommer
factor presents a legal issue which we decide de novo. Id. Whether a new factor justifies sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8157 - 2017-09-19
factor presents a legal issue which we decide de novo. Id. Whether a new factor justifies sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8157 - 2017-09-19
State v. Paul E. Hnanicek
of which are subject to our de novo review. See State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 54, 556 N.W.2d 681, 683
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13762 - 2005-03-31
of which are subject to our de novo review. See State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 54, 556 N.W.2d 681, 683
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13762 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
of the circuit court for Grant County: robert p. van de hey, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 LUNDSTEN, J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45733 - 2010-01-13
of the circuit court for Grant County: robert p. van de hey, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 LUNDSTEN, J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45733 - 2010-01-13
[PDF]
Joshua K. v. Nancy K.
parties” for whom the court should be concerned in custody determinations. Further, he argues that in de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8437 - 2017-09-19
parties” for whom the court should be concerned in custody determinations. Further, he argues that in de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8437 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Frank D. Hurst Corporation v. Tamara A. Johnson
. LIRC, 192 Wis.2d 663, 670, 531 N.W.2d 451, 454 (Ct. App. 1995). As such, we review it de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10530 - 2017-09-20
. LIRC, 192 Wis.2d 663, 670, 531 N.W.2d 451, 454 (Ct. App. 1995). As such, we review it de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10530 - 2017-09-20
John Bettendorf v. St. Croix County Board of Adjustment
court and examine the record de novo. State v. Winnebago County, 196 Wis.2d 836, 842, 540 N.W.2d 6, 8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14376 - 2005-03-31
court and examine the record de novo. State v. Winnebago County, 196 Wis.2d 836, 842, 540 N.W.2d 6, 8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14376 - 2005-03-31
State v. Jose R.
legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Id., ¶16. Here, Jose R. does not contend that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19172 - 2005-08-01
legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Id., ¶16. Here, Jose R. does not contend that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19172 - 2005-08-01
Josephine Eckendorf v. Richard Austin
is a question of law and will be reviewed de novo. See Atkinson, 211 Wis. 2d at 638. ¶8 The Austins
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2391 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law and will be reviewed de novo. See Atkinson, 211 Wis. 2d at 638. ¶8 The Austins
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2391 - 2005-03-31
Frank T. White v. Richard Raemisch
). The de minimus use of force is excluded from constitutional recognition, however, when the type of force
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15778 - 2005-03-31
). The de minimus use of force is excluded from constitutional recognition, however, when the type of force
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15778 - 2005-03-31